An opinion poll is a survey of public opinion from a particular sample.

The sample and questions are designed to indicate the opinion of a larger group, for example the nation.

Some general comments on opinion polling and opinion polling in relation to constitutional change follow these initial comments.

In a nation obsessed at the political and media level in polling, it is worth at this point introducing some cynicism about polling.

The nation’s eminent psephologist, Malcolm Mackerras, once read out a definition handed to him by an ACM supporter.

It went something like this: “An opinion poll consists of the answers of those willing to respond to uninvited questions put without notice on matters on which the respondents have not had the time to consider.”

...from intial polling to the actual vote...

Before we come to our conclusions on polling on a politicians' republic, we should bear in mind that polls taken before a debate on a referendum proposal will normally record significantly support than during the referndum.

The trend line indicates that support for a vague undefined republic is at the time of writing, as a percentage, only in the low forties.

Because the people will have the opportunity to hear both sides, it is likely to fall even further at the actual vote.

This happened in 1999 even with a highly biassed mainline media and a wealthy Yes campign supported by twothirds of the politicians.

This will be exacerbated by the precise question which must introduce a model. Many hitherto Yes voters opposing the model chosen will then prefer the constiutional monarchy.

This is the reason why republicans prefer an intial plebiscite or plebiscites. They are even divided on the number of plebiscites.

...15 Conclusions...

At the present time polling and other evidence suggests fifteen conclusions:

1. Since the 1999 republic referendum, there has been a long term decline in support for a vague undefined ( politicians’) republic. Polling from just before the federal election in 2013 indicates that overall support for such a republic ranges between 33% to 40%

2. From before the referendum, polling has indicated that the middle aged are the most supportive of a vague undefined republic, with lower support among the young and until recently even lower support among the aged. This can be represented by a slightly lopsided bell curve.

3. From 2013, the young have turned more against a vague undefined republic and in most polls are less supportive than even the elderly.

4. Support for a vague undefined republic is strongest among inner city voters, especially middle aged males and supporters of the Greens.

5. Once a republican model is announced as the preferred republic, the Condorcet principle espoused by psephologist Malcolm Mackerras applies and support for a republic will fall. In other words, a significant number of republicans will always prefer the constitutional monarchy over the opposing model. Accordingly the ARM has since 1999 been in the paradoxical situation of refusing to reveal what sort of republic it is actually campaigning for.

6. Interest in republican change is generally weak and declining. According to the July 2014 Newspoll, strong supporters of change fell from 25% in 2011 to 22%. Among the young, strong supporters were down from 20% to 17%. The contrasting experiences of ACM and the ARM in calling public demonstrations leads us to conclude that many more monarchists are strong supporters of their cause than are republicans.

6. The latest poll on the republican model which provides that the people rather than the politicians elect the president - the ''direct elect model''- indicates no greater support than for the 1999 alternative. But when asked how the president should be chosen if Australia were to become a republic, respondents indicate a very strong preference for direct election. In the 2014 Newspoll, the young were, at 87%, the most supportive of direct election. At the same time they were least supportive of change to any republic. Australians seem to be saying: ''We don't want a republic, but if one is forced on us, we- and not the politicians - will choose the president''.7. As with any other polling, a "rogue" poll will from sometimes go against the trend. But the trend lines across the polls and over time indicate declining support for a vague undefined ( politicians’) republic.

8. From this data we conclude that another referendum on the 1999 model would be overwhelmingly defeated and that a referendum on a model involving the direct election of a President would also be defeated ( republican Professor Craven says the defeat of the latter would be greater than in 1999);

9. A referendum delaying change until the end the reign has been proposed by former prime minister Bob Hawke. No significant group has adopted this.

10. ACM has always been opposed to what it calls the ''blank cheque plebiscite''. We believe that if a plebiscite were to be held, the question would be manipulated by taxpayer funded ''spin doctors''. We warn there is likely to be substantial taxpayer funding for “education” and “information”, probably little or no public funding for the No case, possibly no Yes/No booklet, and with strong support from about two thirds of the politicians and from the mainstream media.

11. Experience indicates that in a referendum campaign, support for the affirmative case falls significantly between the announcement of a proposal and the actual vote. This is because the voters have then had some opportunity of hearing both sides of the debate and reading the Yes/No booklet.

12. In a referendum campaign, those who in opinion polls say they are undecided tend to move to the No case or have not revealed their intention to vote No. In a republican referendum, this could be because the republican camp including media outlets has suggested the monarchist case is old fashioned, dated, etc or respondents fear that there may be consequences for those who are known to have voted No.

13. Polls taken now indicating opinions at some future date, say, the end of the reign, are clearly unreliable.

14. Much has been made by republicans about the role of the then prime minister John Howard in 1999. It is untrue that he fixed the convention or the question. His opposition -which was unusual- no doubt encouraged his supporters, but they were unlikely to be republicans. On the other hand it may be that the support of an unpopular Prime Minister and/or government may harm the Yes case. This was said to be one of the reasons why Paul Keating chose not to put a referendum on a republic. Even if the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition were to support the Yes case in a referendum, this will not ensure success, as was demonstrated inone of the referendums in 1967. But if the Parliament unanimously supported the referendum, there would be no official No case, which would disadvantage opponents.

15. The theme of any referendum on a republic will probably be around the proposition that only a politicians’ republic can deliver an Australian Head of State. This was mentioned nine times in the official No case in 1999. To counter this, constitutional monarchists will need to be as well informed on the relevant law and practice and as organised and as disciplined as they were in 1999.

...general comments on polling...

Opinion polls do not claim absolute accuracy and will usually indicate a margin of error. They are not predictions as to the future but an attempt to measure opinion at the time of the poll. This applies to views about what may or may not happen at the end of the reign. These are views held now, not one swhich will emerge at the end of the reign.

There can be errors or a bias in taking the sample. For example a telephone survey excludes those who do not have landlines. Some people will be reluctant to answer, or may give an answer they think the questioner wants.

By looking at trends from different polls taken over time, differences can be neutralised.

...the right question?..

Opinion polls can be biased in formulating questions. Thiscan be unintentional.

The question may vary considerably from the referendum question. A referendum necessarily involves agreeing to a specific republican model. But some polls purporting to measure voting attitudes in the 1999 referendum ignored this and tested support for some vague undefined republic.

But in questions concerning constitutional change certain words can mislead.

For example, there is a debate between republicans and constitutional monarchists over the meaning of Head of State, and the question to be answered in the referendum may not even use that word.

“ Do you think an Australian should be Head of State instead of The Queen ?” assumes we do not already have an Australian Head of State, which is a principal point in issue in the debate.

This is important. In the 1999 referendum, the Yes case used the argument that only in a republic could we have an Australian as Head of State nine times, more than any other.

Even asking whether Australia should become a republic assumes we are not already a republic, albeit a crowned republic

...have they heard both sides? ...

When referendums are announced, it is common to find polling indicates strong public support. But this can change after the public has heard both sides.This was exacerbated in the nineties because the mainstream media supported the republican movement. At the same time the media thrives on conflict and even a biassed media is forced to allow the other side to be heard at least partially.

In the early stages of the campaign in the nineties the public had not really heard both sides of the debate. They had heard more by the time of the referendum.

...polling trends...

Isolated polls should be treated with caution. The trend in polling from different pollsters over time is a better indicator. It is particularly unwise to rely on one poll which goes against the trend.

In 2009 the republicans released a poll to coincide with the tenth anniversary of the referendum. This indicated that 59% support for “a republic.” This went against all the trends and was what may best be called a “rogue poll”, which, we hasten to add, suggests no impropriety.

...pollsters...

In Australia the best known pollsters are:

Newspoll - published in News Limited's The Australian newspaper

Roy Morgan Research - published in the Crikey email reporting service

Galaxy Polling - published in News Limited's tabloid papers

AC Nielsen Polling - published in Fairfax newspapers

Although less well known, UMR has also conducted polls on this issue. Its polls have always found substantially more republican support than any of the others.

Essential media is a new pollster more associated with the unions, without this resulting in any bias.Its political polling produces results broadly in line with the other polllsters.

The newspoll on the republic in The Australian, 21-22 January, 2006 is comforting, as I told the Southern Cross network station Radio 2UE.

Those “strongly in favour” of a vague republic have fallen to 27% from 32% last year. The total of those partly and strongly in favour remains at 46%, down from 51-52% from 1999 to 2003.

What is encouraging is that when the age and sex of the respondents is taken into account, there is a bell shaped curve. The strongest support for a republic comes from middle aged males. Only 23% of the young are strongly in favour.

During the referendum campaign, Julian Leeser and I debated Malcolm Turnbull and another republican at the Hakoah Club, at Bondi. When it was time for questions from the audience, a young woman put forward a view of the republican debate which was often in the background. She said that Australia should become a republic because the British had sent Australian - rather than British- soldiers to their deaths at Gallipoli to fight a British war! This was too much for John Paul, then at the politics department of the University of NSW.

In all the carry on about Prince Charles and Camilla, and the
republican repeat of their tired 1999 argument that the marriage means
we must change our constiution and our flag, it was refreshing to see
the result of the Daily Telegraph Voteline yesterday. We reacted with
the following release to the
media:

26 March 2005

"Seventy five percent say the monarchy can remain relevant in
Australia beyond the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. That is the opinion
of those who replied to the telephone poll in the Sydney Daily
Telegraph on 25 March. One hundred and fourteen people responded, which
is not large, particularly when you consider that the Daily Telegraph
enjoys the highest circulation of any newspaper in Sydney," said
Professor David Flint, National Convenor of Australians for
Constitutional Monarchy.

The attempt by Mr. Beattie to revive the debate was all the more extraordinary given that interest in a republic is everywhere in decline. We have seen this in polling in the states, in particular in Victoria and Western Australia.

The latest Newspoll, published in The Australian on Australia Day, 26 January, 2005, is in line with this trend. To the usual very general question which does not specify a model, and does not mention cost, support for a pie- in- the- sky republic has fallen to a 12 year low.

We have previously referred to what is a time bomb for republicanism in this country, Canada and the other Realms.

This is that polling taken during the referendum indicated that the young are less interested in republicanism than the middle aged. Yet republicans often assume the opposite.

On one occasion former Senator Susan Ryan told the ABC that once the present generation of constitutional monarchists moved on, a republic was assured.

Similar polling in Canada indicates that a strong majority of the younger generation support the constitutional monarchy. Now a poll, the iGeneration poll, has been commissioned by The West Australian and HBF, and published on 18 January, 2005, http://enewspaper.thewest.com.au , and for only $4 is well worth a view.